Author
Abstract
In the post‐1945 rebuilding of local democracy and local government in West Germany the local government statutes enacted by each of the regions (Länder) created a conspicuous variety of local governments that ranged from the council/directly elected (chief executive) mayor form (installed in the South German Länder of Baden‐Württemberg and Bayern) to that of the (British local government‐derived) council/council‐elected mayor, and the city director form (introduced in the Land of Nordrhein‐Westfalen). This made almost for a natural experiment with different local government models. Since the early 1990s, in a striking sequence of legislative moves, all Länder have adopted the (‘South German’) directly elected (chief executive) variant. The legislative motives behind this shift were twofold: first, to strengthen the direct democratic rights of citizens (‘local democracy’); and, second, to improve the capacity of local leadership in running and managing the city (‘governability’). The article argues that — as evidenced by the 50 year‐long practice in the South German Länder — the directly elected (chief executive) mayor form seems capable of fulfilling the double goal of strengthening the administrative leadership in local government and of enhancing its political accountability to the citizens. Furthermore, experience indicates that the potentially ‘over‐powerful’ position of the directly elected mayor (as political and administrative leader) has been counterbalanced and held in check by an active local council and by vigorous local political parties. Lors de la reconstruction de la démocratie locale et des gouvernements locaux en Allemagne de l'Ouest après 1945, les régions (Länder) ont chacune mis en place des statuts de gouvernement local aboutissant à une extraordinaire variété allant de la combinaison conseil‐maire (directeur) élu par la population (dans les Länder du Bade‐Wurtemberg et de Bavière, au Sud) et conseil‐maire élu par le conseil (inspirée du gouvernement local britannique), jusqu'à une forme d'administrateur de la cité (introduite dans le Land de Rhénanie‐du‐Nord‐Westphalie). Il en a résulté une quasi‐expérience naturelle de différents modèles de gouvernement local. Depuis le début des années 1990, dans une succession frappante de mesures législatives, tous les Länder ont adopté la variante (‘sud‐germanique’) par élection directe (d'un directeur). Cette mutation obéit à deux sortes de motifs législatifs: d'une part, renforcer les droits des citoyens à la démocratie directe (‘démocratie locale’) et, d'autre part, améliorer la capacité de l'autorité locale à diriger et gérer la ville (‘gouvernabilité’). Comme le prouve la pratique de cinquante années dans les Länder du sud, la formule du maire (directeur) élu directement paraît en mesure de répondre au double objectif de renforcement de la direction administrative dans un gouvernement local et d'accentuation de sa responsabilité politique vis‐à‐vis des citoyens. En outre, l'expérience montre que la position potentiellement ‘toute‐puissante’ des maires élus au suffrage direct (en tant que chef politique et administratif) a été contrebalancée et contenue par un conseil local actif et d'énergiques partis politiques locaux.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Lesley Hemphill & Stanley McGreal & Jim Berry & Siobhan Watson, 2006.
"Leadership, Power and Multisector Urban Regeneration Partnerships,"
Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 43(1), pages 59-80, January.
- David Sweeting & Robin Hambleton, 2020.
"The dynamics of depoliticisation in urban governance: Introducing a directly elected mayor,"
Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(5), pages 1068-1086, April.
- Malte Möck, 2021.
"Patterns of Policy Networks at the Local Level in Germany,"
Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(4), pages 454-477, July.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:28:y:2004:i:1:p:150-165. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0309-1317 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.